I am not sure it is the ultimate solution to the issue of income inequality; however, I think it is a good step in the right direction.

I think u/S_K_I makes some good comments on UBI here: [np.reddit.com]

The Federal government is bloated and wasteful. If we could trim the Federal Government down to what the Constitution calls for and restored rights to the states and the people, the Federal Government would have %Trillions of surplus without taxing the people. Legitimately that surplus would be distributed to the people which distributed tot he citizens would be $5-6,000.00 per citizen, that is currently being stolen by excessive government. There should not be taxes or redistribution of wealth by means other than normal earnings and exchange. This would provide an "income" for everyone, but not a "universal basic income" Welfare and free handouts are not a solution. The care of the needy and the community should be returned to the community, and the communities should help each other out as needed, not the Government dole line.

I don't think it's a good idea because on the long run it will make people think that they are entitled to obtain something while doing nothing just by looking at how many individuals in Quebec are on wellfare while being able to work you can tell something is wrong and when I see those individuals who are generational wellfare recipients they generally aren't something you could look up to sure some of them really need this program but the level of abuse in this system is astounding and it seems to drag down people who benefits from it rather than lifting them up

I like the idea if you used it to replace welfare. It would take the government out of it. It wouldn't make people work less because it should be kept very low. I like Andrew Yangs idea of $1000/month. I've read some about it from the economist Milton Friedman, and I agree with most of what he says about it. It would also incetivize helping those who can't work. People would be more willing to take in people if there was an extra $12,000/year in it for i
them

It is an excellent idea - wherever it has been trialled it has had overwhelmingly positive results - lifting people out of poverty, reducing crime, encouraging entrepreneurship, improving health and lessening the burden on police, prison and healthcare providers. A great many jobs will disappear with the onset of AI and automation - they will be replaced with jobs requiring high skills and high IQ - the people who stand to lose their jobs to robots will not be qualified or have the IQ level to take up the replacement positions - so, either we just leave them to starve - a deeply uncivilised solution - or we give them the money to live comfortably (not luxuriously) - the fear that millions of people will just waste their lives smoking weed, getting drunk and gaming - expensive hobbies on the UBI - is not true - retired people often live for a further 30 years without work and manage to find plenty to do with their time - the vast majority of voluntary work here in the UK is done by retired people living on the state pension which is a form of UBI for the over 60s. UBI may need to be combined with a form of compulsory birth control but most people choose to have smaller families when contraception becomes freely and widely available.
Listen to Joe Rogan interviewing Andrew Yang who explains UBI very clearly - many people who voted for Trump in 2016 are now considering switching to Yang in 2020 because they know their jobs are going to be automated and nothing suitable will replace them.

It's terrible idea - to de-incentivize people from real work and encourage to waste the time on all kind of stupid and useless hobbies. if you want to be - for example - an artist, you have to do something that other people will consider valuable, if you can't create such artworks, then you have to pay for your attempts by yourself